New Delhi: Just as the last US plane revved up to leave Kabul airport, the United Nations Security Council met in New York to pass a resolution that invoked the Taliban’s “commitment” not to allow terror groups and ensure safe passage for people wanting to leave the country.
At midnight on August 31 local time in Kabul, there were no more American boots on the ground in Afghanistan after 20 years. Fifteen minutes earlier, the UNSC passed a resolution on the war-ravaged nation, drafted by the US, France and the UK, with 13 votes in favour and abstentions from Russia and China.
The draft was first circulated on August 27, just a day after twin suicide blasts targeted thousands of Afghans waiting outside Kabul airport, desperate to leave the country. The Islamic State in Khorasan Province (ISIS-K) had taken responsibility for the devastating blasts which killed over 170 people, including 13 US soldiers.
The Taliban walked into Kabul on August 15 after President Ashraf Ghani escaped in a helicopter with his wife and close aides. It was the culmination of a blitzkrieg military campaign in which the Taliban conquered all but one province in less than ten days.
Following amendments proposed by China and Russia, a revised draft was formally put in blue on Sunday, indicating that the vote would be held immediately.
With foreign secretary Harsh Shringla chairing the session, 13 members, including India, raised their hands to show their approval on Monday afternoon, local time in New York.
In the resolution, there were two mentions of the Taliban – one in the context of terrorism and another on evacuation.
UNSC resolution 2593 demanded that Afghan territory should not be used by any terror groups to threaten or attack any country. It reiterated “the importance of combating terrorism in Afghanistan, including those individuals and entities designated pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999), and notes the Taliban’s relevant commitments”.
Also read: Rana Banerji on How Pakistan Propped Up, Funded and Sustained the Taliban
The Taliban has repeatedly committed, including in the February 2020 Doha agreement, that it will not allow terror groups, especially Al-Qaeda, to target other countries from Afghan soil. The Council added that UNSC-designated terrorist groups and individuals should also not find shelter in Afghanistan.
Noting the Taliban’s statement of August 27, the Council expressed expectation that the insurgent group will “adhere to these and all other commitments, including regarding the safe, secure, and orderly departure from Afghanistan of Afghans and all foreign nationals”.
French president Emmanuel Macron had earlier said on Sunday that the UK and France were drafting a resolution that “aims to define, under UN control, a ‘safe zone’ in Kabul, that will allow humanitarian operations to continue”.
However, there is no reference to a safe zone, under the United Nations, in the final resolution. Sources told The Wire that there had been no proposal for a safe zone, and Macron’s remarks may have been misquoted.
Instead, it called on “relevant parties to work with international partners” to take steps to strengthen security and make “every effort” for the “rapid and secure reopening of the Kabul airport and its surrounding area”. It also specifically mentioned that there were intelligence reports of further terrorist attacks around Kabul airport.
Turkey has been in talks with the Taliban over the technical operation of the Hamid Karzai International Airport, but differences remain about stationing Turkish security forces at the strategically important complex.
Just like taking care of airport security, the Taliban was also not directly mentioned by name when the Council called for “full, safe, and unhindered access for the United Nations” and upholding human rights, especially of women, children and minorities.
The UN’s top body for international peace and security also calls for a “negotiated political settlement, with the full, equal and meaningful participation of women, that responds to the desire of Afghans to sustain and build on Afghanistan’s gains over the last twenty years in adherence to the rule of law, and underlines that all parties must respect their obligations”.
The Council’s exhortation on these topics was addressed to “all parties”, even though it is unclear which other political entities were left in Afghanistan besides the Taliban after the flight by top government functionaries.
Even two weeks after the fall of Kabul, the Taliban has yet to announce a government. Taliban leaders have been holding talks with former Afghan leaders like Hamid Karzai and Abdullah Abdullah in Kabul, while former Northern Alliance members had gone to Pakistan, but there is no sign of progress towards a political settlement so far.
According to diplomatic sources, concerns raised by China and Russia had been “broadly addressed but with alternate formulations maybe not the exact language proposed by them”.
As indicated by official comments later, critical negotiations were only held between the permanent members.
The usage of “all parties” in the text resulted from amendments to the draft introduced after China and Russia felt that the Taliban was being singled out needlessly.
Also read: The Taliban Victory Has Not Put Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons in Danger
After the voting took place, Russia gave three reasons why it didn’t vote in favour of the resolution. “Firstly, despite the fact that the draft resolution was proposed against the backdrop of a heinous terrorist attack, the sponsors refused to mention ISIL and “Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement” – the organisations that are internationally recognised as terrorist – in the paragraph on counter-terrorism. We interpret it as unwillingness to recognise the obvious and an inclination to divide terrorists into “ours” and “theirs”. Attempts to “downplay” threats emanating from these groups are unacceptable,” said Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia.
The resolution does mention ISIS-K’s claim of responsibility for the August 26 airport blasts. While ISIS and ETIM are not explicitly cited in the resolution, both the groups were listed for targeted sanctions under UNSC resolution 1267, whose adherence is specifically mentioned in the resolution.
The Russian envoy also claimed that a ‘brain drain’ of highly qualified personnel would not help Afghanistan at this juncture.
Besides, he also claimed that the drafters ignored the proposal to include language that criticised the freezing of Afghan financial assets.
China also indicated its disapproval of “seizing and freezing Afghanistan’s overseas assets” and imposition of “unilateral sanctions”.
Instead, China’s deputy permanent representative to the UN, Geng Shuang, advocated for greater engagement with the Taliban and felt that the international community should “actively provide them with guidance”.
“The international community should provide Afghanistan with urgently needed assistance for the economy, livelihood and humanitarian needs in order to help the new authority maintain the normal operations of governing institutions, maintain public order and stability, curb currency depreciation and price increase, and embark on the path of peaceful reconstruction as soon as possible,” said Geng.
He reiterated that the “bottom line” in any future political agreement should be that Afghanistan can “must never again become the birthplace for terrorism or the base for terrorists”.
Both China and Russia claimed the resolution was hastily pushed through the Council with hardly any notice. However, neither of the duo cast a veto. By merely abstaining, they allowed the resolution to sail through the Council.
As per sources, their abstention was not really a surprise, as China and Russia were also intent on playing the outcome for their political ends.
After a Council meeting, US ambassador Linda Thomas Greenfield expressed disappointment at the two abstentions at a media stakeout. “I will tell you that within the P5, we consulted very closely. We took into account some of the concerns that both the Chinese and the Russians raised in the draft resolution that was eventually approved.”
The other author of the resolution, the United Kingdom’s Barbara Woodward, was also quick to point out that while the Taliban was eager for the removal of UN sanctions, the Council could also impose additional restrictions if there were concerns related to human rights. She also characterised the resolution as the Security Council’s “first response” to the situation in Afghanistan over the last month.
In September, the mandate of the UN mission in Afghanistan will be up for renewal. Woodward noted that the mandate renewal would provide an opportunity to “look into the medium term”.
Speaking to reporters, India’s Shringla said the adoption of the resolution “unequivocally conveyed that Afghanistan’s territory should not be used to threaten or attack any country or to shelter, train terrorists or plan or finance terrorism”.
“It underlines terrorist individuals and entities designated by UN Security Council (resolution) 1267. This is of direct importance to India,” he added.
Read the full UNSC resolution below.
UNSC Res 2593 on Afghanistan by The Wire on Scribd